A/HRC/17/34 access such services. Limited or decreased staff numbers may hamper the ability of social services to respond to public demand, and the removal of allowances or incentive schemes might have an adverse impact on the efficiency of employees. 47. The above measures will have a disproportionate impact on people living in poverty, particularly those in rural areas and the most disadvantaged, who already face numerous barriers in gaining access to health care and education services. By adopting policies that threaten to reduce the wages of those essential to the provision of such services, States would also jeopardize their ability to provide for the widest possible enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights. These measures run a real risk of constituting unjustified retrogressive measures if they impede the State’s ability to maintain minimum essential levels of enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights. 48. Of utmost concern is the trend towards the cutting of salaries of primary school teachers and nurses, the result of which is that, in some States, the salaries received by teachers and nurses are barely sufficient to allow them an adequate standard of living.29 The erosion of teachers’ wages commonly leads to teacher absenteeism and an increase in informal fees.30 This has an adverse impact on the right of children to education and increases the likelihood of poor child outcomes, particularly in rural areas.31 C. Implementing regressive taxation measures 49. States have an unambiguous responsibility to take steps towards the full achievement of economic, social and cultural rights by using the maximum amount of resources available. In the aftermath of the global economic and financial crises, it has become clear that, in many States, efforts to increase resources for recovery through the whole spectrum of available options have been insufficient, thus impeding States’ compliance with human rights. Low levels of domestic taxation revenue, in particular, could be a major obstacle to a State’s ability to meet obligations to realize economic, social and cultural rights.32 50. While raising tax revenue can be an essential part of an effective policy response to the effects of the crises, States should, however, be cognizant of their obligations to implement policies in accordance with the principles of non-discrimination and equality. In this context, the introduction of or an increase in regressive sales taxes or value added taxes may have a disproportionate impact on those who are already experiencing financial difficulties.33 Regressive taxes may represent an unequal added burden for those living in poverty or experiencing economic hardship, as they constitute a larger percentage of income. The real income of women living in poverty is particularly affected by the introduction of regressive taxes, especially when the introduction of taxes is carried out in conjunction with reductions to expenditure on public services.34 States must be vigilant in balancing the need to increase taxation revenue with their responsibilities to protect the most vulnerable and prevent further inequality. 29 30 31 32 33 34 12 See UNICEF, “Protecting Salaries of Frontline Teachers and Health Workers”, UNICEF Policy and Practice, Social and Economic Policy Working Briefs, 2010. Ortiz and others, “Prioritising Expenditures”, p. 21. UNICEF, “Protecting Salaries”, p. 1. A/HRC/13/33/Add.4, para. 87(e). See, for example, the questionnaire responses of Estonia and Portugal. Zo Randriamaro, “The Impact of the Systemic Crisis on Women in Eastern Africa”, AWID Brief 10, 2010, p. 7.